From: fedora@fea.st
On Sun, 22 Feb 2026 14:35:28 -0000 (UTC), Tara
wrote:
>On Feb 22, 2026 at 9:27:27?AM EST, "Tara" wrote:
>
>> On Feb 22, 2026 at 9:11:09?AM EST, "Noah Sombrero" wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 22 Feb 2026 09:00:37 +0000, Julian
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 22/02/2026 05:41, dart200 wrote:
>>>>> what would you consider pristine nature?
>>>>
>>>> Red in tooth and claw.
>>>
>>> Yeh, and once people have access to it, it no longer is pristine.
>>
>> Most people - not all.
>
>
>So, best to protect Nature from 'most' people.
It's like those ads you see for hideaway, unknown tourist
destinations. After those ads, they aren't anymore, right?
For instance, there are creatures who do not tolerate the presence of
humans. I remember a prof telling us about a population of big horn
sheep in the sonoran desert. If there are big horn sheep in an area,
and you build a road through that area, those sheep will leave. Not
to mention whatever disturbance a road makes. The presence of humans
alone changes the area. How to protect it? Prevent people from going
there.
I can hear the poopooers lining up to deny any such thing, and if so,
so what? Who cares? Not us, that is for sure. Have you got your
claims ready of the effect on the economy of such measures? What
about the cactus harvesters? How are we supposed to get our supply of
prickly pear cactus jam? Ooops, the secret is out, there is such a
jam. Now what?
Ohhh, those extreme cactus huggers.
The question was about pristine nature. The question is already
extreme.
--
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<>> to <<>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian shrinks in horror and warns others away
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
